George Brown College – Academic Policies and Guidelines INTEGRITY IN SCHOLARLY RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP – Page 1 1. Purpose George Brown College (referred to herein as “GBC” or the “College”) aspires to attain the highest standards of integrity in scholarly research for its faculty, staff and students. While GBC begins from the premise that all members of the College community are committed both individually and institutionally to integrity in scholarly activity, this policy has been developed to address any concerns about responsibility and accountability in research and scholarship. In addition to adherence to College policies, all research conducted by members of the College community must follow the responsibilities and corresponding policies for researchers, Institutions, and the Agencies contained in the Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research. The Framework officially launched on Dec 5, 2011, is an umbrella document that describes Tri-Agency policies and requirements related to applying for and managing Agency funds, performing research and disseminating results. It also outlines the process that institutions and Agencies follow in the event of an allegation of a breach of Agency policy. 2. Scope 2.1. This policy applies to all full-time and part-time faculty of the College and any person who teaches, conducts research, or works at or under the auspices of the College. Students participating in scholarly research at the College will also be subject to this policy. It applies equally to all research projects, led either by the College or by other institutions, in which GBC personnel or students are participants. 2.2. At this time, GBC does not plan on engaging in research that would involve biohazardous materials. The College will continue to comply with the Health Canada Laboratory Biosafety Guidelines, and notify all funding agencies if the College plans to engage in research involving biohazardous materials. 2.3. At this time, GBC does not plan on engaging in research or training involving animals. The College will continue to comply with the Canadian Council on Animal Care Guidelines, and will notify all funding agencies if the College plans to engage in research involving animals. 2.4 The college endorses and takes as its guide, the Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research. If there are any issues or discrepancies regarding the College policy, the Framework shall be referred to. The procedures in this policy may be amended from time to time to accommodate future approved amendments to the Framework or as otherwise deemed appropriate. 3. Acknowledgement 3.1. This policy is based upon the Scholarly Integrity Policies of the University of British Columbia, the University of Calgary, the University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Centennial College and Fanshawe College. The definitions in Section 4 are based on those in the Tri-Agency Framework, 2011. Approved by the Board of Governors, December 12, 2012. George Brown College – Academic Policies and Guidelines INTEGRITY IN SCHOLARLY RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP – Page 2 4. Definitions Allegation: Information that indicates misconduct in research and scholarship has occurred or an allegation of such misconduct. AVP: The Assistant Vice President of Applied and Institutional Research. Conflict of Interest: Occurs when a person’s judgment may be influenced, or appear to be influenced, by private or personal interests. Destruction of research record: The destruction of one’s own or another’s research data or records to specifically avoid the detection of wrongdoing or in contravention of the applicable funding agreement, institutional policy and law as regulations and professional or disciplinary standards. Fabrication: Making up data, source material, methodologies or findings including graphs and images. Falsification: Manipulating, changing, or omitting data, source material, methodologies or findings including graphs and images, without acknowledgement and which results in inaccurate findings or conclusions. Gross misconduct: ‘Misconduct’ judged to be deliberate or reckless, going beyond negligence, and of sufficient gravity to justify initiation of dismissal proceedings. Inadequate acknowledgement: Failure to appropriately recognize contributions of others in a manner consistent with their respective contributions and authorship policies of relevant publications. Initiator: A person who provides information to the College that indicates that misconduct in research and scholarship may have occurred or who makes an allegation of such misconduct to the College. Invalid authorship: Inaccurate attribution of authorship, including attribution of authorship to persons other than those who have contributed sufficiently to take responsibility for the intellectual content, or agreeing to be listed as author to a publication for which one made little or no material contribution. Investigative Committee: Has the meaning ascribed thereto in section 13 of this policy. Misconduct in Scholarly Research: The intentional violation of professional standards in the performance of research and scholarly activities: These include, but are not limited to: a) Fabrication or falsification of research data; b) Plagiarism, theft of ideas or intellectual property, or appropriation of another’s work; c) Willfully misrepresenting and misinterpreting (for any reason) of findings resulting from conducting research and scholarly activities; Approved by the Board of Governors, December 12, 2012. George Brown College – Academic Policies and Guidelines INTEGRITY IN SCHOLARLY RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP – Page 3 d) Failure to acknowledge or recognize the contribution of others, including co- researchers, students, and research assistants; e) Attribution of authorship to persons other than those who have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for its intellectual content; f) Use of the unpublished works of others without permission; g) Use of material in violation of the Copyright Act; h) Abuse of supervisory power affecting collaborators, assistants, students and others associated with the research; i) Financial misconduct, including the failure to account for or misapplication or misuse of funds acquired for support of research. Failure to comply with the terms of conditions of grants and contracts; j) Failure to honour the confidentiality that the researcher promised or was contracted to as a way to gain valuable information from a party internal or external to the College; k) Failure to adhere to terms and conditions of contracts with a third party (in most cases external to the College) that is sponsoring research; l) Material failure to comply with relevant Federal or Provincial statutes or regulations or other agency and College policies for the protection of researchers, human subjects, or the health and safety of the public, or for the welfare of laboratory animals. m) Failure to comply with Health Canada Laboratory Biosafety Guidelines. n) Failure to reveal any material conflict of interest, as defined below, to sponsors or to those who commission work. o) Deliberate destruction of one’s own research data in order to avoid the detection of wrongdoing, or tampering with or destroying the research of another person, either for personal gain or out of malicious intent. Misconduct shall not include: Situations of honest error despite due diligence, conflicting data or valid differences in experimental design or interpretation. Mismanagement of Conflict of Interest: Failure to appropriately manage any real, potential or perceived conflict of interest, in accordance with the College’s policy on conflict of interest in research. Plagiarism: Presenting and using another's published or unpublished work, including theories, concepts, data, source material, methodologies or findings, including graphs and images, as one's own, without appropriate referencing and, if required, without permission. Redundant publications: The re-publication of one's own previously published work or part thereof, or data, in the same or another language, without adequate acknowledgment of the source, or justification. Research and scholarly activities: Any internally or externally funded research or scholarly activities which the College and the academic community in general, consider to be research or scholarly activities: These include: a) Finding solutions to practical problems through the application of knowledge b) Experimental discovery Approved by the Board of Governors, December 12, 2012. George Brown College – Academic Policies and Guidelines INTEGRITY IN SCHOLARLY RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP – Page 4 c) Activities leading to the publication of books, monographs, and contributions to edited books. d) Consulting and contracting work under the auspices of the College, and other professional activities involving research. Respondent: A person of whom the College has received information relating to possible misconduct in research and scholarship. SRCR: The Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research. The SRCR provides substantive and administrative support for the Panel on Research Ethics (PRE), the Panel on Responsible Conduct of Research (PRCR), and for the Tri-Agencies with respect to the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2nd edition (TCPS 2), and the Tri- Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research (the Framework). Tri-Agencies: The three federal research granting Agencies – the Canadian Institutes of Health Research